Literature DB >> 17132033

Patients' preferences for healthcare system reforms in Hungary: a conjoint analysis.

Baktygul Akkazieva1, Laszlo Gulacsi, Agnes Brandtmuller, Márta Péntek, John F P Bridges.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To illustrate how conjoint analysis can be used to identify patient preferences for healthcare policies, and to measure preferences for healthcare reforms in Hungary. DATA SOURCE/STUDY
SETTING: Data was collected via a mail-based survey and a direct survey administered in a rheumatology out-patient centre in Flór Ferenc County Hospital, Budapest, Hungary (n = 86). STUDY
DESIGN: We designed and administered a conjoint analysis to the study population. Attributes and attribute levels were developed on the basis of key informant interviews and a literature review. Additional demographic, occupation and healthcare utilisation data were also collected using surveys. A mixed effects linear probability model was estimated holding respondent characteristics constant and correcting for clustering. DATA COLLECTION: Conjoint analysis questionnaires were administered by a physician to 50 consecutive rheumatology patients in a clinic and an additional 36 were mailed by post. PRINCIPAL
FINDINGS: The response rate for the physician-administered survey was 98% (but 18% of these were excluded for inconsistent preferences) and 53% for the mail survey, leaving a final sample of 59. Regression results (R2 = 56.8%) indicated that patients preferred a health system that was not cost constrained (p = 0.003), was based on solidarity (p < 0.001) and where patients were empowered (p = 0.024). Further, they would choose a system with no choice of provider to avoid co-payments (p = 0.005).
CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that patients have clear preferences for healthcare system policy. In order to develop evidence-based healthcare policy and to empower patients in the healthcare system, methods such as conjoint analysis offer a simple yet theoretically grounded basis for policy making.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 17132033     DOI: 10.2165/00148365-200605030-00005

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Appl Health Econ Health Policy        ISSN: 1175-5652            Impact factor:   2.561


  10 in total

1.  Using best-worst scaling choice experiments to measure public perceptions and preferences for healthcare reform in australia.

Authors:  Jordan J Louviere; Terry N Flynn
Journal:  Patient       Date:  2010-12-01       Impact factor: 3.883

2.  Consumer preferences for hearing aid attributes: a comparison of rating and conjoint analysis methods.

Authors:  John F P Bridges; Angela T Lataille; Christine Buttorff; Sharon White; John K Niparko
Journal:  Trends Amplif       Date:  2012-04-17

3.  Identifying and prioritizing strategies for comprehensive liver cancer control in Asia.

Authors:  John F P Bridges; Gisselle Gallego; Masatoshi Kudo; Kiwamu Okita; Kwang-Hyub Han; Sheng-Long Ye; Barri M Blauvelt
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2011-11-02       Impact factor: 2.655

4.  Designing family-centered male circumcision services: a conjoint analysis approach.

Authors:  John F P Bridges; Sarah C Searle; Frederic W Selck; Neil A Martinson
Journal:  Patient       Date:  2012       Impact factor: 3.883

5.  Can patients diagnosed with schizophrenia complete choice-based conjoint analysis tasks?

Authors:  John F P Bridges; Elizabeth T Kinter; Annette Schmeding; Ina Rudolph; Axel Mühlbacher
Journal:  Patient       Date:  2011       Impact factor: 3.883

Review 6.  A systematic review of stated preference studies reporting public preferences for healthcare priority setting.

Authors:  Jennifer A Whitty; Emily Lancsar; Kylie Rixon; Xanthe Golenko; Julie Ratcliffe
Journal:  Patient       Date:  2014       Impact factor: 3.883

7.  Public preferences for the return of research results in genetic research: a conjoint analysis.

Authors:  Juli Murphy Bollinger; John F P Bridges; Ateesha Mohamed; David Kaufman
Journal:  Genet Med       Date:  2014-05-22       Impact factor: 8.822

8.  Evaluating the Impact of Incentives on Clinical Trial Participation: Protocol for a Mixed Methods, Community-Engaged Study.

Authors:  Karah Y Greene; Jerome T Galea; Brandon Nguyen; Andrea N Polonijo; Karine Dubé; Jeff Taylor; Christopher Christensen; Zhiwei Zhang; Brandon Brown
Journal:  JMIR Res Protoc       Date:  2021-11-23

9.  Depressive symptoms and posttraumatic stress disorder as determinants of preference weights for attributes of obstetric care among Ethiopian women.

Authors:  Magdalena M Paczkowski; Margaret E Kruk; Fasil Tessema; Ayalew Tegegn; Sandro Galea
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2012-10-10       Impact factor: 3.240

Review 10.  Patient and Public Preferences for Coordinated Care in Switzerland: Development of a Discrete Choice Experiment.

Authors:  Anna Nicolet; Clémence Perraudin; Joël Wagner; Ingrid Gilles; Nicolas Krucien; Isabelle Peytremann-Bridevaux; Joachim Marti
Journal:  Patient       Date:  2022-01-24       Impact factor: 3.481

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.